If I understand android correctly the kernel source has to be open. And the Google rom source is also open (AOSP, right?) But what about the rom, like das bamf, source. Is it open and able to be downloaded?
The HTC Sense Framework and related applications are not open source. You modify it by decompiling to bytecode and manually editing the results.
Ok so lets take the GB roms. They are based off the GB leak. So what does "based off" mean in that context. Are they tweaking source files or are they tweaking xml, build.prop, etc. files? This might be asking a too complicated question, but lets take das bamf sense 3.0, they took the GB leak, and then added the Sense 3.0 Framework on top, I understand then resized images and such, but what had to be "done" to make it work? Find working apks for camera and such?
What I am getting at, is I am curious about Rom development. I am going to start small, thinking CM7 over on the Nook Color, seems like a good device to mess around on. And I know that source is available due to it being built from AOSP, but I was wondering about the Roms built off of, say, MR1 that is delivered by Verizon.
There is no source to the gingerbread leak or for any of the leaks based on sense, rom creators just do what I said in my last post. That's how it's done for anything build off of sense period.
If you dont believe me, try googling for "htc sense source code" and see how far that gets you. If that still doesnt make sense, google "decompile code"
If you want actual source code, you have to stick with building off of roms created with the Android Open Source Project like CM and OMFGB.
Oh I believe you. Thanks for the info, that is what I was curious about. So most of the Sense development is in a hex editor? Interesting.
you could hex edit, but there's easier ways. Google for apktool and dalvik bytecode instructions
Thanks. That info is very helpful in understanding all of this stuff.
sure, good luck
Related
I'm very interested in doing some ROM development, though I'm quite the beginner. I know my way around Java and can hold up against some C, and I've also done some apps. I have a few questions though before I get started.
After I run make on the AOSP, how can I test my build with the emulator and my device (Eris)?
Will using the build on my Eris work, provided there are no build problems?
How could I base a ROM I make off of an existing ROM? (For example, KaosFroyo)
What is the difference between cooking a ROM, and running make on the AOSP?
I think thats about it for now. Thanks for taking a look!
Chiggins said:
I'm very interested in doing some ROM development, though I'm quite the beginner. I know my way around Java and can hold up against some C, and I've also done some apps. I have a few questions though before I get started.
After I run make on the AOSP, how can I test my build with the emulator and my device (Eris)?
Will using the build on my Eris work, provided there are no build problems?
How could I base a ROM I make off of an existing ROM? (For example, KaosFroyo)
What is the difference between cooking a ROM, and running make on the AOSP?
I think thats about it for now. Thanks for taking a look!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1) I'll answer the Eris part, since I have done that more than once... You need to zip up the following:
a) /system folder from 'out/target/product/generic (or desirec if you used a vendor tree)
b) a /META-INF/com/google/android folder structure with a working update-script
c) a boot.img with an Eris kernel and appropriate init.* scripts in the ramdiskThen sign the resulting zip. There's your base ROM. You can also just throw that into dsixda's kitchen.
2) Yes. Define 'work'. You'll need an Eris kernel, Eris specific drivers in the right place, and the correct settings in the init.* scripts and build.prop. It also helps to have a wlan.ko in /system/lib/modules that is compiled against the kernel that you are using.
3) If you take an existing Eris ROM and use it as a base, you're golden. The Eris specific stuff is already there. At that point, you can theme, add/remove apps/etc. Give credit where credit is due though. Personally, I recommend that you start with a stock ROM or AOSP, but that's me.
4) Well, I suppose it depends on who you ask... Some devs don't really like the 'cook' moniker. It sort of implies that you are just taking parts from everywhere else and making something tasty instead of coming up with something new. Compiling AOSP is not really coming up with something new, but at least you started 'from scratch'.
Even if you don't want to use a kitchen, I recommend that you download dsixda's and my Android Builder to look at the scripts. You can learn a lot by looking at those.
I've been following the development of so-called ROMs for the Vibrant (and other SGS devices), but I have yet to see a single AOSP ROM. Even when Samsung released the original kernel sources for 2.1, there were no AOSP 2.1 ROMs. Why not? Is it because they don't know which BLOBs to pull for insertion or the proper vendor overlays?
Some developers have done great work with SGS kernels (especially supercurio and his Voodoo kernels ... eugene373's tend to always wipe the internal SD card unnecessarily ...). But, a kernel does not a ROM make ... therefore I ask, what is truly missing to build an AOSP ROM. I've gone through the sources, but I don't follow makefiles too well.
I know we have another month or so before Samsung is obligated to release their 2.2 kernel sources, but that should have no impact on 2.1 AOSP ROMs. Therefore, I ask "what is the hold up?" What is missing, and what might I contribute ...
Need 2.2 source code...
2.1 is a dead horse--why bother when 2.2/2.3 are out?
The reason to bother is to at least get AOSP running. Once its on 2.1, it'll be easier to get 2.2 AOSP running on it. But claiming 2.1 is a "dead horse" is the wrong path ... the real question still stands: after 9 months on the market their still are no AOSP ROMs.
MIUI
Now that vibrant 2.2 source is released ... we finally have a REAL AOSP port and my all time favorite from my old HD2 the MIUI.... so keep your heads up and wait for it to get finished.
Get a custom rom. There are so many good devs doing them don't waste your time on AOSP....... until they release the actual source code...... on April 22
sarim.ali said:
Now that vibrant 2.2 source is released ... we finally have a REAL AOSP port and my all time favorite from my old HD2 the MIUI.... so keep your heads up and wait for it to get finished.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except, the 2.2 source for the Vibrant has not been released. The SGH-T959D that shows Froyo sources on Samsung's site is for the Canadian Fascinate, not the US T-Mobile Vibrant. Samsung has yet to release the 2.2 sources.
oka1 said:
Get a custom rom. There are so many good devs doing them don't waste your time on AOSP....... until they release the actual source code...... on April 22
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except the so-called "custom ROMs" are just modifications on the stock theme, a replacement kernel and a change of some of the supplied applications.
There is nothing close to a full "custom ROM" such as CyanogenMod or MIUI because we don't have Samsung's sources. What is passing for a "custom ROM" for the Vibrant are just repackaged files. It is akin to the "ROM cooking" that took place for the WinMo phones, not a truly ground-up build from source that is possible with Android.
EDT/Devs4Android has the MIUI build. From Source.
TW has a 2.2.1 in testing.
EDT has a 2.2.1 Beta released.
TW has a 2.3 AOSP in testing. From Source.
EDT has 2.2 AOSP in testing. From Source.
What you want is out there for you.
Watch the forums and reply when a call for Alpha testers is posted.
Hopefully it won't be long before you see a full TW/EDT/Devs4Android collaboration!
I think what the original poster is trying to ask (and I have the same question) is why were there never any real 2.1 AOSP, cyanogen5 for the vibrant. The source for 2.1 has been around for many months. Were some other proprietary bits missing, was the released source code such a mess that it was unbuildable, something else? With those questions in mind, why will things be any different when the 2.2 source comes out?
mattb3 said:
I think what the original poster is trying to ask (and I have the same question) is why were there never any real 2.1 AOSP, cyanogen5 for the vibrant. The source for 2.1 has been around for many months. Were some other proprietary bits missing, was the released source code such a mess that it was unbuildable, something else? With those questions in mind, why will things be any different when the 2.2 source comes out?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, this is more towards what I was getting at. We do not have Samsung's kernel sources for 2.2. And, we do not have a Samsung provided vendor overlay.
When we receive these two pieces, then a true AOSP build will be possible. However, we do have the 2.1 kernel sources, so why wasn't a true AOSP build possible then? What was missing, and can we actually expect Samsung to release the overlay that's needed?
Actually, that's true. I know it was old but why didn't anyone build a 2.1 cyanogen or aosp rom? (Not to say its easy.)
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
A noob question, kindly can someone explain what is the vendor overlay stuff?
Many thanks!
Where have you been?
rpcameron said:
I've been following the development of so-called ROMs for the Vibrant (and other SGS devices), but I have yet to see a single AOSP ROM. Even when Samsung released the original kernel sources for 2.1, there were no AOSP 2.1 ROMs. Why not? Is it because they don't know which BLOBs to pull for insertion or the proper vendor overlays?
Some developers have done great work with SGS kernels (especially supercurio and his Voodoo kernels ... eugene373's tend to always wipe the internal SD card unnecessarily ...). But, a kernel does not a ROM make ... therefore I ask, what is truly missing to build an AOSP ROM. I've gone through the sources, but I don't follow makefiles too well.
I know we have another month or so before Samsung is obligated to release their 2.2 kernel sources, but that should have no impact on 2.1 AOSP ROMs. Therefore, I ask "what is the hold up?" What is missing, and what might I contribute ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude theres been a true AOSP ROM for the Vibrant since like december and thats CM 6.1
Im running it now
rpcameron said:
I've been following the development of so-called ROMs for the Vibrant (and other SGS devices), but I have yet to see a single AOSP ROM. Even when Samsung released the original kernel sources for 2.1, there were no AOSP 2.1 ROMs. Why not? Is it because they don't know which BLOBs to pull for insertion or the proper vendor overlays?
Some developers have done great work with SGS kernels (especially supercurio and his Voodoo kernels ... eugene373's tend to always wipe the internal SD card unnecessarily ...). But, a kernel does not a ROM make ... therefore I ask, what is truly missing to build an AOSP ROM. I've gone through the sources, but I don't follow makefiles too well.
I know we have another month or so before Samsung is obligated to release their 2.2 kernel sources, but that should have no impact on 2.1 AOSP ROMs. Therefore, I ask "what is the hold up?" What is missing, and what might I contribute ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For probably the same reason that many phones with non AOSP firmware running 1.5/1.6 did not bother with AOSP 1.5/1.6 when they were released around the time 2.1 source hit. Why bother developing at all for what is essentially an "out of date" OS.
The only people it seems who actively continue to develop for existing (as opposed to new) firmware are manufacturers and carriers. This stupidity should be left to the manufacturers who still do this.
One of the larger snags way back then (sits in his rocking chair on the porch) was a lack of understanding of the phones proprietary aspects and how to work around them. But we have a fairly clear understanding of Samsung's boot process now, and RFS can now easily be turned into a distant memory.
I would wager a guess that the apathy towards 2.1 will not repeat itself once we have 2.2 source widely available and the low level similarities between 2.2 and 2.3 should have Gingerbread being more than the experiment it currently is. It's been barely more than a week since Eugene's little present manifested and there are already proper and stable kernels available.
Keep in mind that the devs we do have, have done a phenomenal job of cleaning up, speeding up, and drastically enhancing our existing 2.2 release. And perhaps to the point where many will not really care, though I know many would still like to see CyanogenMod6/7 properly on this phone.
Master&Slave™ said:
Dude theres been a true AOSP ROM for the Vibrant since like december and thats CM 6.1
Im running it now
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Um, that's not quite true. The CyanogenMod.com website lists 0 files available for download for either experimental or stable files. The CM6.1 you must be running is not a true CM build.
Also, CM is not AOSP, but rather AOSP with modifications.
phrozenflame said:
A noob question, kindly can someone explain what is the vendor overlay stuff?
Many thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The vendor overlay tells the AOSP build system which proprietary files are needed from the device that are not available in source form. This includes things like GPS and video drivers, baseband firmware for wireless radios, &c.
hi everybody !
a month age i decided to compile a new rom for my Galaxy S absolutely from AOSP source ( branch 2.2.1_r1 ) after some compile-time problem and many painful steps to resolve ,eventually the rom successfully built and can boot it up flawlessly on emulator.
i create a nandroid backup of current rom and installed the compiled one. but i am facing new problem :
1- the phone successfully boots but after short while screen began
flicking several time and the phone go in deep sleep and never wakeup
( power button or menu button does not do any thing )
2- touch screen works only for some second that I can unlock the
phone
3- there is no network available
4- I have downloaded samsung opesource package for GT-I9000. it
contains a folder named 'platform' but when i merge these files to
AOSP , the compile process stops and fails again. if there any one can
help me which files from samsung source should i merge and how ? if
you now the answer and dont have spare time then some internet link or
online document is really useful .i have no problem studding and
reading and searching . reaching to target is my only hope .
I am really disappointed why there is not a good and complete step2step tutorial to compile an AOSP rom for galaxy s (GT-I9000) !!
such docs is available for phones like dell streak , desire , dream , magic , .... . i really want to to active these aspect on XDA forum and with help of all you ( mods and masters ) try to create such tutorial that any one in world can use to refer . i think XDA is the only reference on net to collect and create such help and document. please help me and leave PM or comment to agree ot disagree and from where can i start ?!! thank in advanced .
edit :
there is a google groups post that i send my question in Android-platform . if you prefer please join this group and active that post to ask any question related to 'galaxy s compile from source ' .
post located at http://groups.google.com/group/android-platform/browse_thread/thread/da5d6f18f3bd3c9b
I had hear about cyanogenmod earlier and even tried to install it once when I was a rank noob without much luck. In my recent explorations of kernels and cifs I found myself at the cm site. It seemed pretty organized and I thought it might be interesting to have another go at it. I followed the instructions and installed it and it worked flawlessly. I restored my apps from Titanium backup and I'm up and running. I did some research in our forum and that, combined with some of my own observations, makes me wonder about the relationship between CM and some of the other roms like Vegan Ginger (which I really like) I get the impression that some or even all of our roms here are derivatives of CM that have been tweaked further by our devs. Is this correct? What is the difference between Vegan Ginger for example and CM7? I'm really puzzled because the kernels and the basic look and feel seem very similar. Someone even remarked that all of our roms are derivatives of CM. I'd be interested to know some of the background and the pedigrees of the various roms and their relationship with CM.
Cyanogenmod is one of the more known and talented group of Android ROM developers, developing for many devices and being a large team of dedicated coders, artist, etc...
They have taken the stock AOSP code and have modified, enhanced and added features far beyond the stock code. Most ROMs you see that have these additions are because they are forked from Cyanogenmod's github and then edited to look like their own (different graphic images, different text wording, etc..).
CyanogenMod was also one of the only ROM devs that I know of that got a Cease & Desist letter from Google early on and created the separated config of installing the rom.zip and Gapps.zip (Rom image and Google Apps).
As for how Vegan-Ginger relates...
Project Moving to Gingerbread
January 12, 2011 14 Comments
Just a quick update for everyone so you know where we stand at this point. Because of all the issues I have had trying to reverse engineer fixes into VEGAn, we have decided to move away from the actual VEGA system image. We have decided to move the project to a MODIFIED CyanogenMod 7 (aka Gingerbread) ROM with “inspiration from VEGA”. This will allow us to not only fix issues more easily but our work would also directly benefit the CM7 camp as well. This would give also give everyone the choice of a completely stock gingerbread like ROM as well.
THERE IS NO ETA AS OF YET FOR A RELEASE. When there is one…. you all will be the first to know! Exciting Times Ahead.
-GoJimi
Extreme GingerNerd
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The first thing I want to say is that my English is not really good. I hope you understand my questions.
I have an idea for a new Android rom, but I'm faced with a dilemma. I want to have as much as possible supported devices, so I also can just build a launcher apk which can be installed through Google Play. In this way all mobile devices with the minimal platform version can use it. The biggest problem is that I don't only want a replacement for the application launcher but also the notification drawer and everything else. Is it possible to replace them also? I don't think so, so I think I'll work on a custom rom.
The next problem is which base rom I would use if I really build a custom rom. It's most likely to use AOSP as base because it's clean. The question is which version of AOSP: Gingerbread, Ice Cream Sandwich, or the newest version Jelly Bean. You would probably say Jelly Bean because this is the newest version. The problem is the phone support. Gingerbread is supported on most phones. If I build ICS or JB the phones which are supported by Cyanogenmod are easy to support, because I can use their device files. The only problem is that my phone, the Samsung Galaxy Gio is not officially supported and the unofficial port is not really stable. I don't think it's a big problem to use this device files and just wait till the developer makes it more stable, but I don't know for sure.
The last thing I want to know is if it's really that simple to support multiple devices. If I read tutorials about porting existing roms to your device they all say you just have to add your device files to the source and compile it. But they never say something about the kernel. Most devices need another kernel because their hardware is different isn't it? Please explain me how this works.
I'm sorry about this hazy story, but please help me before I make wrong choices. Thanks on purpose.
Wietse
WietsedeVries said:
The biggest problem is that I don't only want a replacement for the application launcher but also the notification drawer and everything else. Is it possible to replace them also? I don't think so, so I think I'll work on a custom rom.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
These changes you are talking about can be done. They are system changes so not supported by the android app installer.
Eg: Your notification drawer, status bar are part of SystemUI.apk. The source for this is can be found in the AOSP source code under android/frameworks/base/...
You can make your modifications, compile it into an apk and then make a flashable zip to replace the current one (or push it via a rooted adb console).
or you can compile the entire source code into a flashable zip (eg CM7,9 etc..) and use it a replacement ROM with your modifications.
This is the line between an application under the android runtime and the android runtime itself.
these files, under framework are part of the OS. so to provide a customized version of the operating itself is what people like to call ROMs.
Now ROMs (like any OS) are device dependant. Windows has the code to run in a lot of different hardware configs, but android aims to be small. It should have only the minimum required code to efficiently run itself on a device.
Thats the kernel. The kernel communicates with the hardware and so the rest of the hardware can happily talk to a working kernel and expect the hardware to function as advertised. Kernel is a simple program which goes into the RAM on system start and sits there directing the operation of the phone.
Kernel devs work on making sure the hardware and the android runtime work perfectly together. Now, in this imperfect world, not all sources are open, even though they should be. and therein the issue lies.
If you want to compile android from source and make sure it works on your phone, first you need to make sure you have the kernel with all the changes(patches) to it made by the vendor (chap who made the phone and bullied you into buying it) to get it working on your hardware.
If you dont have that, you have to do it yourself. Or wait for someone else to do it.
once you can compile android and get it working on your phone with all the itty bitty hardware working A-OK.. then you can browse through the source, make changes as per your individual requirements and compile it into a ROM.
see the changes to the OS are separate from the changes to the kernel. The kernel changes are for hardware-software interaction so they are phone SPECIFIC.
but changes to your custom android OS (ROM) can be "cherry-picked" from other ROM/gerrit/AOSP/CM/AOKP sources and put inside your own source tree to get included in your build.
so if you have all the device / kernel stuff from a working android distribution, you can take the source of another android distribution and swap the device stuff into it and see if it works.
hope this helps.
wingie6200 said:
These changes you are talking about can be done. They are system changes so not supported by the android app installer.
Eg: Your notification drawer, status bar are part of SystemUI.apk. The source for this is can be found in the AOSP source code under android/frameworks/base/...
You can make your modifications, compile it into an apk and then make a flashable zip to replace the current one (or push it via a rooted adb console).
or you can compile the entire source code into a flashable zip (eg CM7,9 etc..) and use it a replacement ROM with your modifications.
This is the line between an application under the android runtime and the android runtime itself.
these files, under framework are part of the OS. so to provide a customized version of the operating itself is what people like to call ROMs.
Now ROMs (like any OS) are device dependant. Windows has the code to run in a lot of different hardware configs, but android aims to be small. It should have only the minimum required code to efficiently run itself on a device.
Thats the kernel. The kernel communicates with the hardware and so the rest of the hardware can happily talk to a working kernel and expect the hardware to function as advertised. Kernel is a simple program which goes into the RAM on system start and sits there directing the operation of the phone.
Kernel devs work on making sure the hardware and the android runtime work perfectly together. Now, in this imperfect world, not all sources are open, even though they should be. and therein the issue lies.
If you want to compile android from source and make sure it works on your phone, first you need to make sure you have the kernel with all the changes(patches) to it made by the vendor (chap who made the phone and bullied you into buying it) to get it working on your hardware.
If you dont have that, you have to do it yourself. Or wait for someone else to do it.
once you can compile android and get it working on your phone with all the itty bitty hardware working A-OK.. then you can browse through the source, make changes as per your individual requirements and compile it into a ROM.
see the changes to the OS are separate from the changes to the kernel. The kernel changes are for hardware-software interaction so they are phone SPECIFIC.
but changes to your custom android OS (ROM) can be "cherry-picked" from other ROM/gerrit/AOSP/CM/AOKP sources and put inside your own source tree to get included in your build.
so if you have all the device / kernel stuff from a working android distribution, you can take the source of another android distribution and swap the device stuff into it and see if it works.
hope this helps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you very very much for your explanation! It's a pity it's impossible to hit multiple times "Thanks".
I think I'm going to make a modified SystemUI.apk but you didn't tell the application launcher is also in this file. Did you just forget this or is this stored in another file/folder? And the lock screen? And I want also to replace the boot animation if it's possible.
If I take the source files of the SystemUI.apk of AOSP ICS, does this work on every phone running ICS? Included CM, AOKP and other (smaller) custom roms? And my last question: Since SystemUI.apk a apk file is, is it possible to edit these files through Eclipse and build it in Eclipse? Or do I get errors?
//Edit:
Still another question: How much work is it to, as example, port a modified Gingerbread SystemUI.apk to ICS? (Or vice versa)
WietsedeVries said:
Thank you very very much for your explanation! It's a pity it's impossible to hit multiple times "Thanks".
I think I'm going to make a modified SystemUI.apk but you didn't tell the application launcher is also in this file. Did you just forget this or is this stored in another file/folder? And the lock screen? And I want also to replace the boot animation if it's possible.
If I take the source files of the SystemUI.apk of AOSP ICS, does this work on every phone running ICS? Included CM, AOKP and other (smaller) custom roms? And my last question: Since SystemUI.apk a apk file is, is it possible to edit these files through Eclipse and build it in Eclipse? Or do I get errors?
//Edit:
Still another question: How much work is it to, as example, port a modified Gingerbread SystemUI.apk to ICS? (Or vice versa)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Only way is through exchanging the png files since porting the whole .apk is impossible.
Sent from my Jelly Beaned Ace
Thanks for the answer. And do you also know the answers of the other questions?
Sent from my GT-S5660 using xda app-developers app
WietsedeVries said:
If I take the source files of the SystemUI.apk of AOSP ICS, does this work on every phone running ICS? Included CM, AOKP and other (smaller) custom roms? And my last question: Since SystemUI.apk a apk file is, is it possible to edit these files through Eclipse and build it in Eclipse? Or do I get errors?
//Edit:
Still another question: How much work is it to, as example, port a modified Gingerbread SystemUI.apk to ICS? (Or vice versa)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are two roads you can go now - one is use apktool to *decompile* apk the apk file that you've taken from your phone, it doesnt convert the app to java source code but java bytecode in .smali files (like an assembly version of the source) but you will have access to the resource files (xml, images etc..) so you can replace them and create some new themes.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1814441
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1760133
And no - a GB systemUI.apk will *NOT* work on ICS. It is very probable that any changes you make through any of these methods can brick you phone. So make sure you have CWM and a nandroid backup.
If you want to add/edit functionality within the source code of systemUI.apk, you need to learn how to compile Android from Source. i would suggest getting hold of the CyanogenMod source tree for your device and playing around with it.
Ginger bread is CM7 and ICS is CM9.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1552090
once you have the full source tree, you'll find a folder called android/frameworks/base/core/...something../systemui/..
this will contain the javasource code for your application. Here you can edit stuff to your hearts content!
Note that this cannot be compiled standalone by eclipse. The Android build system must be used to compile this (cuz its a system app).
a nice resource i used when i was doing the same thing :laugh:
http://iserveandroid.blogspot.in/2011/01/how-to-implement-your-own-status-bar.html
cheers and have fun.
Quick question.
Can you download one specific apk from Android source and then just compile that or do you have to download the entire source, compile the entire rom and pick out the one apk?
Id like to look at adding/merging some things to Mms.apk which I cant do just through apktool/xml but if it requires a full build environment Ill have to add it to the pile of things to get round to
Never really looked at compiling from source, tend to stick to what I know (which isnt a lot!)